Copyright & Licensing

[McNeight]

• Update address of Free Software Foundation, which closes Licensing #91
• All of the various copyright statements have been consolidated to the following:
  Copyright © 2000-2016 AlphaSierraPapa for the SharpZipLib Team

[McNeight]

This also closes #89, and in case it is necessary:

I certify that I own, and have sufficient rights to contribute, all source code and related material intended to be compiled or integrated with the source code for the #ziplib open source product (the "Contribution"). My Contribution is licensed under the MIT License.

[christophwille]

How about we consolidate a tad more - a single license file, no license header/author headers any more. We did that with other projects too.

[McNeight]

Since some of the files were adapted from the GNU Classpath library, do we want to have the entire library covered by that one license? Or do we want to have everything MIT licensed except for those files?

[christophwille]

The origins of SharpZipLib... it started out its life as a quick port of Java code (@mkrueger did the original version), and out of respect for this, the identical license was adopted. The origins show insofar as the naming is inconsistent with the .NET naming conventions. (it was originally used in SharpDevelop to compress code completion data, that's why we did in the first place)

We meant to change this long ago (meaning tidy the code), but it never happened. The reason to consider doing this at all was mostly the many people asking about the "weird" license. Yes, having all MIT would be way better contribution-wise as well as end-user wise.

[jfreilly]

Looks fine

[xied75]

Regarding the Java legacy, is that still a plan to rewrite/remove those? Given it was done long time ago, (at the time Java was lacking lots of today's modern features, let alone .NET), I feel it should be worth it to simply rewrite all the Java files. If you guys agree we may create an Issue to cover those tasks.